Question #1:
Dear Teacher
How have you been, Sir? I have been quite exhausted, so I took my time
getting to this email.
[omitted]
Response #1:
Thanks for the update, my friend. I will be praying for your victory in this legal case. The one thing I do know about legal issues of this sort is that they are indeed very draining. Even total victory does not come without a great cost often. You have the advantage of being completely in the right.
The wicked lie in wait for the righteous, intent on putting them to death; but the LORD will not leave them in the power of the wicked or let them be condemned when brought to trial.
Psalm 37:32-33 NIV
Praying for a quick, easy and decisive end to all this my friend, so you
can be free to concentrate on more needful matters.
Please give my best to your family!
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #2:
Lots of people, even well meaning believers, claim that objects can become cursed or demonic if used for pagan or other occult purposes, is there any truth to this and can we really ask God to "purify" or "uncurse" whatever things like that, granted it's not stuff that explicitly exists for occult purposes?
Response #2:
If any believer, no matter how well-meaning, says this sort of tripe, they are drifting far away from the Lord. What is the difference between this and black magic or Voodoo? Nothing I can see. It is beyond toxic to let oneself think this way. These people should read the Bible. Nothing like this in scripture. Here is what I do read:
Many of those who believed now came and openly confessed what they had done. A number who had practiced sorcery brought their scrolls together and burned them publicly. When they calculated the value of the scrolls, the total came to fifty thousand drachmas. In this way the word of the Lord spread widely and grew in power.
Acts 19:18-20 NIV
Some of these links my be helpful as well:
Paganism, Idolatry, Mythology and the Occult
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #3:
It's there a chronological reading plan that I can follow? I know that
Job is the oldest book so shouldn't Job be the first book in a reading
plan? I'm just asking and seeking the truth.
Thank you
Response #3:
Good to hear from you. It's been a while.
I don't have any chronological reading plan. If you read these two links
(Chrono I;
Chron II),
you'll see that I don't put any stock in the idea that chronological
organization/reading is profitable or even really possible.
The book of Job which you mention is a good example of this. It
certainly was not the oldest book written. It wasn't written until
Solomon's day, some six centuries or so after Moses was given to write
the Pentateuch. Some of the Psalms were written before the book of Job
was written, some after. Some of the events referred to in Psalms
occurred long before the events of the book of Job, some have not yet
occurred. The more one looks into this "problem", the knottier it
becomes.
My advice in Bible reading is to form one's own plan, based upon one's
own spiritual growth. It's not a bad concept to read some from both
testaments daily. I read some from the gospels and the epistles daily
(in Greek and in English), and from the Old Testament from various
sections (I read through the Hebrew front to back and repeat; in
English, I read some from the Torah/histories, Psalms, and prophets in
English). Reading from front to back in an English version is not the
best approach since it will leave the NT untouched for the vast majority
of reading sessions just because of volume. But however it's done,
reading the Bible is important and good, and the more the better. See
the links:
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #4:
Doc, I need to say something that's been on my heart for quite some time. I used
to be scared that somehow the Faith we know is a lie and some other religion,
some works based or at least one without the love and peace Christ gives would
be the truth...
But none of that matters to me, not since I've realized why they're so
different. Their "gods" or the universe according to them or whatever governing
force, either runs on basically instinct at best and is a mindless and arbitrary
judgment machine at worst, or their gods are megalomaniacs and ultra-controlling
narcissists who say their glory is based on their power or arbitrary position
without ever keeping to a standard on which such a claim can be made.
Many of them aren't even the final say, even the "head gods" have minion gods to
do the work they can't. They judge people on their works without ever giving a
reason their works have reached a good enough point, usually not even giving a
clear goal at all, all while often acting no better than the people they call
unbelievers. At worst their logic is, boiled down,"this is right and wrong
because I say so, period. Any reason it shouldn't be or any claim it's not based
on a standard like my own attributes is automatically debunked". Often times you
don't even have to follow them specifically, most other pantheons are good,
sometimes like in Hinduism you can basically invent your own gods and its all
good!
And almost universally they allow their followers to be hypocrites at some level
or at least partake in sins that clearly are awful (at least in their original
forms). I have to say it now, and say it with me:
I would rather burn in whatever hell or whatever other eternal punishment Allah
or Brahman or whoever else might have for me than spend a second serving
basically Satan if he had managed to overthrow God.
Response #4:
It does my heart good to hear you say this, my friend.
Once we get to the point of realizing that there is no other WAY forward
(Matt.7:13-14; Jn.14:6), that is the time we tend to get serious about
consistently embarking on this journey to Zion the Lord has for us.
Blessed are those whose strength is in you, whose hearts are set on pilgrimage. As they pass through the Valley of Baka, they make it a place of springs; the autumn rains also cover it with pools. They go from strength to strength, till each appears before God in Zion.
Psalm 84:5-7 NIV
Be pleased to follow this conviction up with a concomitant determination
to grow in Christ. In doing so, "you will receive a rich welcome
into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" (2Pet.1:11
NIV).
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #5:
Hello--I hope you are well. Remember our exchange here? I know you said that "sela" was the Aramaic equivalent for "petra" in Greek, but I think you gave a different word for "stone." So, what exactly does "kepha" mean in Aramaic? Just "rock"? Does it denote a chunk of rock and petros does in Greek? Just need clarification here. Thanks.
Response #5:
Jastrow's Aramaic dictionary, THE lexicon for Rabbinic studies which covers the Talmuds etc., has for kepha "rock, stone, hailstones, pearls, jewels" etc., mostly dealing with smaller rather than larger entities. That is in keeping with Greek petros, "pebble", for which Peter is named, but is definitely of a different magnitude than the Greek word petra, which is more like Yosemite's El Capitan. Our Lord uses the different words to make just the distinction we have talked about in the past. He is "the Rock", we, like Peter, are stones in the edifice of His Church. As Peter himself said . . .
You also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
1st Peter 2:5 NKJV
There is no occurrence in the Old Testament of the root upon which
Cephas (Peter) is based, neither in its Hebrew nor its Aramaic parts.
So there is no basis in the Bible for making the specious argument author
makes. One may add that much depends on which
Aramaic one means. There is Biblical Aramaic in the OT, there is the
older Aramaic which this reflects, there is the Aramaic of half a
millennium later spoken by some in Palestine and the Middle East
generally, there is the Aramaic or Syriac of the next half millennium,
and there is the Aramaic of the Talmuds et al. They are all somewhat
different and have somewhat different vocabularies. What they all have
in common is that we have limited information about them all. And we are
especially lacking in the particulars of the Aramaic of Jesus' day. So
to go to a lexicon which covers multiple periods and assert something
like "kepha means both ROCK and stone" is pointless, even if it has one
foot in the truth. And it is especially pointless since Jesus' is
recorded as having said this in Greek, not in Aramaic. So for this
"argument" to have weight, we'd have to assume that the gospels are all
translated from Aramaic. But there is indisputable evidence that not
only is that not the case but also that Greek was spoken by most people
in Palestine at that time as well as Aramaic and Hebrew too (think
Switzerland where everyone speaks German, French and Italian . . . at
least).
Here is what Lenski, a Lutheran commentator, had to say about this issue
in this passage:
"We also challenge the reference to the Aramaic in order to wipe out the distinction between petros and petra. We know too little about the Aramaic to assert that when Jesus spoke these words He used the same Aramaic term in both statements. We should like to know more about the Aramaic as it was spoken at the time of Jesus. Therefore, this appeal to the Aramaic substitutes something unknown and hypothetical for what is fully known and insured as true on the basis of the inspired Greek of the holy writers themselves."
After all, Peter himself wrote his two epistles in Greek, very good Greek, I might add. So there is absolutely no basis for assuming that Aramaic even comes into the picture here . . . except if a person is trying to make the scriptures mean something other than what they actually say.
Here are some links:
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #6:
Wow! That was thorough. We used to have Lenski's commentary on the NT,
but had to give it away, when we moved and downsized. So, it is only
speculation when the Catholic Church--and commentaries--claim that if
Jesus spoke in Aramaic in this passage from Matthew, He would have used
the same word--kepha. That is the conclusion I came up with, but you
cemented it.
Thanks again and God bless you.
Response #6:
My pleasure!
Question #7:
Hi Bob,
Love reading the site. A ton of useful information and the Q and A's, I
sometimes read before bed. Some of them even crack me up on the way you put
things.
Hope you keep doing Ichthys until you're 100 my friend!
Response #7:
Thanks for the shot in the arm, my friend!
Hope you are doing well. Just finished the last day of teaching for
semester #65 at U of L.
Re: "Hope you keep doing Ichthys until you're 100 my friend!" Oh
I hope not! Anyway, I don't think any of us have that long left. We'll
find out soon enough. Meantime, keep running a good race for Jesus
Christ (that's the best way to prepare for whatever lies ahead).
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #8:
Hello--I have a quick question: In Titus 3:5, I see different verb tense
for the part that says "not by works which we have done in
righteousness...." with some translations having "had done", others
"have done", "done" or even "did."
Titus 3:5 He saved us, not by the righteous deeds we had done, but
according to His mercy, through the washing of new birth and renewal by
the Holy Spirit. (biblehub.com)
I was wondering which is correct?
Thanks! Take care.
Response #8:
In Greek, the verb is in the aorist, the simple past tense, so "did" is
the closest English equivalent. However, on the one hand, the verb
"do/did" in English has different connotations in the past, and on the
other hand, Greek generally (though not as much so in the NT), likes to
use the aorist where we would use the perfect in English. So I would say
that "have done" is defensible; "had done", the pluperfect, however, is
not.
In any case, Paul is expressing the clear truth that it is God's grace
in Jesus Christ and not our works which produces salvation (whenever we
did, do or will do them). That is the salient point.
What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”
Romans 4:1-3 NKJV
For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it [i.e., salvation] is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.
Ephesians 2:8-9 NKJV
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #9:
Pastor Luginbill,
I am only a little ways into your Hebrews Chapter 6 and it is awesome,
thank you for your wonderful work. I just wanted to share with you that
what I pasted below is what happened to me in 1992. It was not a good
thing. I had a couple of weeks of really bad dreams, and in a short time
stopped going to church and walked away from anything to do with our
Lord. Now I want to be clear that this was not all the church that I was
attending fault. I was responsible ultimately for my falling away, but
it certainly didn’t help. Thank you for this, I’m hopeful it will maybe
help others.
You wrote: “Perhaps the greatest shortcoming of modern-day evangelism is
its failure to share this critical information with new converts
immediately after they profess faith in Christ. Common practice is for
evangelical missions and events to partner with local churches and hand
the new believers over to such organizations . . . as if this fulfilled
the need.”
Response #9:
Thanks for this!
We've all stumbled from time to time (Jas.3:2). Serious believers bounce
back quickly . . . and they don't allow themselves to get bogged down by
worrying about yesterday.
(12) [It is] not that I have already gotten [what I am striving for], nor that I have already completed [my course]. Rather, I am continuing to pursue [the prize] in hopes of fully acquiring it – [this prize for whose acquisition] I was myself acquired by Christ Jesus. (13) Brethren, I do not consider that I have already acquired it. This one thing only [do I keep in mind]. Forgetting what lies behind me [on the course] and straining towards the [course] ahead, (14) I continue to drive straight for the tape, towards the prize to which God has called us from the beginning [of our race] in Christ Jesus. (15) So as many as are [spiritually] mature, let us have this attitude (i.e., of focusing on our spiritual advance and reward and not getting hung up on what lies behind: vv.13-14), and if in any matter your attitude is off-center, God will reveal that to you (i.e., assuming you are mature and are advancing as you should). (16) But with respect to the progress you have made, keep on advancing in the same way!
Philippians 3:12-16
So keep running your good race, my friend! What is important is what we
do in response to the Lord today.
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #10:
Dear Bill
What does it actually mean not to be under the Law?
I understand that the Law can't save us because we can't be good enough
or keep it enough well all fall short, so it has to be by Grace.
Therefore fruit is the evidence of salvation. This is where it gets
complicated for me. How much fruit is proof we are saved, how little is
proof we have issues?
For example we should make financial restitution if we have stolen, and
confess it to the victim. Confess our sin.
But suppose a person doesn't confess it to the person but makes a
partial anonymous financial restitution? Even though an effort has been
made, surely this would count as only part obedience, half hearted and
dishonest in part. Is this good fruit, bad fruit, lukewarm. How much
fruit is evidence of being born again?
Thanks
Response #10:
Paul says these two things in Romans:
What then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace? By no means!
Romans 6:15 NIV
Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.
Romans 13:10 NIV
Put together with all the very many things in scripture on this topic we can say
that believers today in the age of the Spirit, the Church Age, are not
responsible to live by the strictures of the Mosaic Law, the Old Covenant which
has been replaced by the New Covenant of Christ's death on our behalf
(Heb.8:13). Sin, however, is still sin. So while we don't have to keep Kosher,
we are also not allowed to commit adultery, e.g. By doing right in following the
law of love, we will, in heeding the Spirit, not be doing anything sinful in any
case. It's when we fail to listen to His still, small voice that we end up in
sin.
In terms of "How much fruit is proof we are saved, how little is proof we
have issues?" Jesus tells us that even a cup of cold water given "to one of
these little ones who is my disciple" will not fail to be rewarded (Matt.10:42).
On the other hand, James assures us that "faith without [any] works [whatsoever]
is dead (Jas.2:20). Therefore all believers will have something to put before
the Lord, otherwise they wouldn't be believers. Is there any believer who's been
around in the faith more than a day who hasn't said a prayer on someone else'
behalf, e.g.?.
On the other hand, the fact of eternal rewards OUGHT to motivate us all to be
productive for the Lord and as much as possible. Here's where it gets confusing
for many believers who have been indoctrinated to think of charity and giving
money as the end all and be all of Christian production. In fact, true
production for Christ is 1) growing up spiritually; 2) passing the tests that
come to the mature; 3) helping others with steps one and two by exercising the
spiritual gifts we've been given in the ministries the Lord leads us to. Giving
a panhandler five bucks might be a "good work", but perhaps not. That would
depend on the inner thoughts of the one giving and whether or not the panhandler
belonged to Jesus (i.e., "one of these little ones") or was helped in that
direction by the gift. But beyond all argument the vast majority of "works" that
seem good to unbelieving human beings are nothing more than "wood, hay and
stubble". They won't save unbelievers (who are actually judged on the basis of
the effrontery of assuming what THEY did was worthy of salvation: Rev.20:12-13),
and they won't be of any value to believers either at the judgment seat of
Christ where they will be burned up (1Cor.3:12-15).
Re: your question about "financial restitution", I wouldn't want to "make a
rule" about anything you ask about here. I don't see anything wrong with doing
this if the Spirit (rather than misplaced guilt) is the motivating factor. I can
see reasons NOT to do it, e.g., if, for instance, we are talking about
pre-salvation misdeeds long past when doing something like this would open a
person up to unnecessary legal trouble.
It also would seem to me to make a difference as to whether the person so
described acted as an unbeliever or even as a believer in deep reversion who has
now turned around. This is a "judgment call" situation and depends on the
totality of the circumstances, not least of which is where the person in
question is spiritually at the moment and who it is we are talking about making
restitution to and why.
Again, it's very easy to get deceived by guilt (the devil is adept at using this
emotion against believers). Somewhere between being manipulated by guilt on the
one hand and being completely blasé about what we've done in the past on the
other, there is a sweet spot of proper motivation and clarity of spiritual
vision. But I can say with assurance that none of this has anything to do with
being born again. Believers are believers because they have put their
faith/trust in Jesus Christ for salvation. Thereafter, life is filled with
situations wherein we are tempted to do wrong or conflicted about what is right.
As we grow spiritually, these things all become clearer (see the link:
Spiritual Discernment). The main point is to keep growing. That is how we
follow Christ. Not by adhering to some set of rules and regulations, no matter
how well intended.
Also, very important to note: confession of sin is meant to be made to God
alone, not to any human being (priest or person wronged). When we repent and
confess, He forgives us . . . and we are then forgiven on the basis of the blood
of Christ, NOT on the basis of any amends we think to have made.
Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest.
Psalm 51:4 KJV
There is a lot about legalism in the new Hebrews series. See especially
this link in
Hebrews chapter one.
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #11:
What does James mean when he says confess your sins to one another?
On the works front if you get it wrong don't you end up being guilty of
a sin of omission?
Thanks
Response #11:
If one reads the context of the "confession" in James chapter five, it
is clear that the situation in general is one of a believer who has been
struck with severe divine discipline and is asking for prayer for
healing as a result. In such cases, it is understandable that such a
person would admit to those he/she is asking for help from that this
illness is the result of discipline for sinful behavior (and thus what
that behavior is). "Confession" is an unfortunate translation there
because of the theological connotations the word has picked up which do
not apply to that context. True "confession" can only go to God because
only God has the power to forgive sin.
There are sins of omission and commission, but sin is a very complicated
subject, and many more things are sinful than most people have any idea.
Just about anything we think can be sinful, e.g., and any sin would have
landed us in the lake of fire, absent our Lord's sacrifice for us on the
cross . . . even if some of them don't "register" with us as being that
bad. So when it comes to the day by day applications all believers have
to make regarding everything we think and say and do, we do our best to
avoid sin, but we are humble enough to realize that we won't be able to
go a day without sinning (and that we need to be constantly confessing:
it's in the Lord's prayer, after all).
If you haven't already done so, please read BB
3B: Hamartiology: the biblical study of sin (at the link).
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #12:
Hi Dr. Luginbill,
They couldn't go through with the surgery because __ has sepsis. They
said that __'ll have to recover from the infection first before they can
operate, so we have to wait until the next time a transplant becomes
available.
I can't say that we're not disappointed, but I know it's all in God's
timing.
It's also strange to think that we're waiting around for someone else to
die who's kind enough to donate their liver so that __ can live...that's
something that __ keeps bringing up whenever we talk.
Whenever I don't understand, I pray to God that He will do His will and
not mine. Every time in the Bible when the Israelites went against His
will it was always for the worse. I keep thinking about that too.
Please keep praying for us.
In Him,
Response #12:
I'm sorry to hear about the delay. I'll keep praying on this.
I have to say that your own spiritual maturity is very obvious from this
email, so that is an encouragement to me.
Hope all is going well for you otherwise, my friend.
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #13:
The transplant was given to someone else, so we have to wait again for
another one to become available.
Another one became available the next day, but the doctors said it
wasn't a good fit after evaluating the donor.
Apparently this can happen several times before they can go through with
the surgery.
It's causing a roller coaster of emotions for me and my family,
especially __ who has to brace herself for an 8-12 hour surgery just to
be told they can't go through with it. Also, it's a three hour drive to
the hospital from where they live, so it's been a lot of back and forth.
I know it's in God's timing.
If __ dies, __ will be with the Lord so I have peace in that. But I pray
that __ will live to meet the grandchildren someday.
In Him,
Response #13:
Thanks for the update.
I'm keeping you and your family in my prayers.
Your evident faith in this trial is a truly wonderful witness.
In Jesus,
Bob L.
[note: the transplant took place and was successful! Thank you
everyone who remembered our friends in your prayers]
Question #14:
Dear Bob
Thank you for my personal email from you! And all the work you’ve done.
I was looking on YouTube to see if you’d posted there at all and discovered a
man who was recommending Ichthys content and your qualifications to make it (in
Jesus name). I was so pleased to see another of your fans on screen. His channel
is “EverythingIsFine”
So more people should find your work.
And so congratulations for 25 faithful years, and all that work! I have indeed
found Hebrews audio files
and started listening to it as when I’m tired this is a better route into my
attention. The voice is good!
I’ve recently had a lapse and been plagued with worry, but I pray and I get out
the things I’ve read that comfort me. Maybe I could ask you something in the New
Year if I may? I heard someone teach on a different matter, but claimed a Greek
tense meant something different to what I see it does in the divorce passage and
the contradiction unsettled my certainty and peace. I’m hanging onto your
knowledge of Greek! Please don’t be angry with this situation though; for one,
he agrees with your diagnosis about remarrieds. It’s just I saw something and my
mind alighted and stuck on it and I’d value your help please!
Must go, I’ve an appointment, and I’ve sullied your calm enough!
May God bless you and have a lovely Christmas celebrating Jesus’ first coming.
I’m singing “once in Royal David’s city” at church tonight
In Christ
Response #14:
Good to hear from you, my friend – and thanks so much for the good words
and interesting report!
From the tone and the text, you do seem to be doing a lot better, and
that is a great encouragement. When it comes to sore spots like this,
however, the devil is always trying to irritate them again. Since he's
had success in the past, why wouldn't he?
As to "Greek tenses" (there are four "tense stems"), I'm afraid I'd need
something more specific to be able to weigh in on what you heard. It is
true that the issue of tense-stems and grammatical tense-aspect outside
of time is one which is mainly over the heads of "just enough Greek to
be dangerous" individuals, and many wild claims of interpretation are
often made as a result. Happy to go into detail if you could give me a
bit of background or tell me what passage you're referring to exactly.
Keeping you in my daily prayers, my friend!
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #15:
Doc, I forgot what you said on logic/reasoning and spiritual truth, didn't you say something along the lines of that trying to apply logic to solve the truth of Scripture and God is foolish because those things are beyond the scope of what those can perceive, at least on their own?
Response #15:
God gave us the ability to reason and it's not wrong to use that reason
in regards to the Bible, as long as we do it in a godly way, putting
faith first and "logic" second.
My main concern in these discussions is trying to head off the
scholasticism that ends up trying to "solve theological problems"
(whatever those are) by engaging in logical discourse as if this
produced its own truth virtually apart from scripture (that is pretty
much the history of academic theology).
We know for certain the truth of what scripture tells us, as long as we
are interpreting it aright. There are certain deductions that can
sometimes be made from such truth if we are careful 1) not to go beyond
what is written; 2) do not fail to take all pertinent scriptural
information into account; and 3) listen to the Holy Spirit.
Constructing theologies mostly on the basis of reason alone has gotten
the church-visible into manifold troubles from early times (most haven't
yet recovered from Augustine, e.g.). Better to focus on what scripture
really says, because any derivative "principle" from which we derive a
logical result is likely to be not 100% accurate. And since it is
not scripture itself, the inevitable result will be that the deduction
is likely even further off. Traditional theology then makes deductions
from deductions with the end result of Calvinism or other schools which
put more stock in their own formulations than what the Bible actually
says.
Wishing you and your family a blessed 2024!
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #16:
I'd like to hear your thoughts on how to tackle talking about matters
like this that are "permissible but not beneficial."
We were talking about eating healthy. I've made more of an effort myself
recently just because I'd always meant to and I finally got around to
it, and I was talking about how I'd seen results, and was gratified that
good choices I'd made were bearing fruit basically.
But __ had brought up how she's been spending a lot of time preparing
things for homeschooling her grandkids and teaching them the Bible, and
actually made the conscious decision to not cook as much, and instead
heat up more frozen food, because she was spending her time on these
other things. She wanted to know what I thought of that, given what I'd
just said about eating healthy.
Now, I don't think we are talking about only eating ice cream and hot
pockets here (i.e., this is not some extreme version of unhealthiness in
view). Part of me wanted to push on the point that there are ways to eat
quite healthy even without much time expenditure, but I was also very
cognizant of the rocks and shoals here re: legalism, and didn't trust
myself to speak correctly in the moment, so basically didn't push on the
matter.
We did talk about how self-caused obesity (i.e., in cases where it is
truly a self-control problem rather than a medical problem) is certainly
a moral issue for Christians, despite what the so-called "body
positivity movement" might preach. But then parsing out the lines of
what is gluttony and self-control problems vs. what sets people up for
failure implicitly came up too. So, for example, our culture's general
sedentary lifestyle, the food additives that make overconsumption
biologically difficult to resist, the powerful advertising and lobbying
of food companies to even manipulate the science (lying and twisting the
truth for profit), and so on.
I'm quite tempted to say that God gave us brains and intelligence to use
them, and failing to exercise them is actually our fault. In my opinion,
"being healthy" involves doing the things that basically every single
doctor under the sun will tell you:
Avoid overly processed foods
Avoid lots of added sugar
Eat your vegetables
Get enough sleep
Exercise regularly
Reduce sources of stress in your life
There are plenty of things that are debated ad nauseum (cf. butter vs.
margarine, are eggs healthy or not, etc.), but the basics needed to be
healthy are dead obvious. So people who make poor choices and end up
with compromised health (that very negatively impacts their ability to
serve in the Church)... why shouldn't we be down on that?
But the thing is, this same thing applies to everything. For example,
lots of people make very foolish decisions with their money, as it seems
to me. Rather than saving, living frugally within their means, and only
buying things they need, people burn through money in what seems to me
an irresponsible manner. And sometimes they make poor decisions even if
they "mean well", but that too is their fault/actually in their control,
in my opinion. If they don't do their research before making choices,
well no one held a gun to their head and made them be hasty, right?
To put all this differently, I've had a really hard time giving an ounce
of slack when it comes to decisions that to me seem like an objectively
poor use of the resources God gave someone to be steward of (including
one's body, one's resources, and so on). Ignorance gets floated as an
excuse a lot, but ignorance is a choice, since we have free will, and
information is always at our fingertips. It seems to me to be the
inescapable burden of truly possessing free will.
The problem is, I know I am very unyielding in this way, by personality.
I tend to run things in my life by a very rigid, reasoned set of rules
that other people in my life (such as my family) view as sort of
extreme. I have opinions about everything, and can always explain "why"
in great detail. And I view much of the rest of the world as operating
very inefficiently relative to the path I have tried to set out on.
Where I get stuck is in how much of this is a function of wanting to
100% things for the Lord in a way that is godly (as I would tell you
that is my motivation in a lot of it---and mean it), and how much of it
is actually pride and legalism I am somewhat blind to. Basically, I see
people making really suboptimal/inefficient decisions all the time,
things that are within their control. It makes me die a bit inside,
given all the time and resource waste, all the lost potential. And it
makes me want to say something.
Anyway....
To pull it back (sorry, that was a bit rambly), I get stuck in terms of
how to talk about these things. Encouraging people to grow spiritually
is easy, since it is nice and black and white = "you should always spend
more time reading your Bible, taking in in-depth Bible teaching,
praying, and doing ministry". But what about encouraging them to ditch
things in their lives that are permissible, but not beneficial?
Encouraging them to make better choices in a practical sense, like
soldiers upon the battlefield trying to be most efficient?
If we say that some of the matters are clearly suboptimal without any
exceptions (e.g., perhaps polygamy and smoking), then are they "wrong"
even if they aren't "sinful"? Or can we only call them "suboptimal" and
"not ideal"?
And then there are things which are "sometimes" not the right choice but
"sometimes" could actually be the ideal course of action in some set of
circumstances. Being overly dogmatic about these things (even in the
same way we might be about polygamy and smoking) would be legalism, even
if we never used the words sinful, would it not? That is, if we said
they were globally suboptimal in all circumstances, when that in fact is
not actually true?
I am confident that "not ideal" is not quite equivalent to "sinful". But
then there is also "whatever is not of faith is sin" (Romans 14:23).
Sometimes I think I get it all mixed up and blended together in my head.
And I just wonder if you see a way to pull it all together into neater
buckets.
Sorry for the length on this one. No rush.
[omitted]
Your friend in Jesus,
Response #16:
In terms of eating, I wouldn't worry about it. Worrying about eating is a problem. Eating is not a problem. We all do unhealthy things. We could all improve in all manner of ways. But none of these things is very spiritually important.
For the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.
Romans 14:17 NKJV
From what I've been able to glean about the beast's religion, antichrist and his followers are going to make a very big deal out of this issue (both ways, i.e., excess as well as asceticism). Until then, I think it's great that you are eating healthy!
For bodily exercise profits a little, but godliness is profitable for all things, having promise of the life that now is and of that which is to come.
1st Timothy 4:8 NKJV
However, just as with exercise, diet has "little" import spiritually, but does run the risk of having negative ones if any sort of spiritual value is assigned to that, and this will be even more of a danger in time soon to come.
The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth. For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving,
1st Timothy 4:1-4 NIV
It's good to brush one's teeth. It's good to get eight hours sleep. It's
good to dress warm on a cold day. It's good to get exercise every day.
It's good . . . we could go on. But if we spend too much time and energy
and resources on our health, take care that we don't put undue focus on
this admittedly important area of life. If I lose an hour's sleep
because I want to finish this Bible project I'm working on, well, what's
more important? If I end up eating "Hot Pockets" tonight for the same
reason, well, maybe that's not the best dietary choice but it's still a
question of priorities.
As you were tempted to counsel our friend, perhaps I could finish my
project and still have time to boil some broccoli – but then I might be
half an hour short on my sleep. In my opinion, as long as we are keeping
our priorities straight in putting the Lord and His truth first and in
fighting a good fight, then many other things (financial management,
relationship work, keeping up appearances with our homes so as not to
give a bad witness to our neighbors, etc., etc., etc. – and once you're
married, MANY more etc.'s), then all will be well in the end. If I end
up with my blood pressure a point too high because of those Hot Pockets,
that's not good . . . but I got that section done on the ministry, and
that is more important to me. Ideally, we do it all well. But if we are
going to err, let it be on the side of putting spiritual things first.
"It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing."
John 6:63a NKJV
I'm continuing to pray for your health, my friend. Keep me in the loop.
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #17:
Hi Bob,
God is good, isn't He! I said to __ again today that I was so thankful to the
Lord for answering my prayers for them. __ said, "The Lord definitely listened".
I'm very aware at this point they'll say that just for my benefit but that's
okay. I just continue to plant the little seeds when given the opportunity,
continue to pray for them and their salvation and to trust the Lord to do the
rest. Thanks so much for your prayers for them too!
Thanks for all your good and kind wishes for this year too. Sometimes it seems
like I'm just plodding along each day doing the same thing. But then I remind
myself that that's not actually true when each day I'm trying to make more
progress in my moment-by-moment, step-by-step walk with the Lord. It's not
always easy and that in itself is always going to keep me busy! There's never a
moment in the Christian life where we shouldn't be busy doing what the Lord
wants us to be doing - all in His strength and power. And I always remember that
it all counts towards storing up our treasures in heaven!
Thanks so much again for your prayers! Keeping you in mine too.
In Jesus
Response #17:
That is good news, and a great encouragement to me.
Thanks for continuing to fight the fight, come what may. That is what we
all need to be doing.
. . . and gird on the sword of the Spirit – which is the Word of truth.
Ephesians 6:17a
Thanks for the prayers! I promise to keep it up from here too.
But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
1st Corinthians 15:57 NIV
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #18:
Hello Dr. Luginbill,
It is with great sadness and heavy heart to tell you that my daughter __
has succumbed to the long battle with chronic lyme disease and passed
away. __ wanted __ body donated to medical science to help someone else
to help find treatment for this debilitating disease. I am sad also that
I do not think __ accepted Jesus as __ Savior before __ passed. __ was
such a kind and caring person and I know He would have wanted __ in
heaven if __ just would have said yes to Him.
Prayers still needed for daughter, also a non believer, for strength at
this difficult time and to be open to receive His gracious offer of
forgiveness and salvation.
It is certainly not a good way to start off the new year but I pray
yours will have many blessings.
In His precious name,
Response #18:
I'm terribly sorry to hear your sad news, my friend. I will definitely
keep you and __ on my prayer list (and have updated the Ichthys list).
In terms of salvation, we can really never know whether or not
unbelievers who have been exposed to the gospel finally did respond when
facing the very end. I would venture that there are many "death bed"
conversions which we won't know about until we get to the other side.
So we can have hope that our loved ones did turn to the Lord, if only at
the very last moment, especially if we have witnessed to them ourselves
– God alone knows our heart.
Praying for your comfort too, my friend.
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #19:
Hi Dr L,
I was talking to someone on reddit, and I thought we were becoming
friends. Though he is not a believer. But he talks about his problems in
life, and I realize now, that you can't be friends with a nonbeliever
because the way they live is just so different from the way you live.
You want to give advice from the Bible, but you can't, because they
reject God. So you can't help, but I don't want to be a sympathizing yes
person, which is all that is left to you. So that was a good lesson.
I wanted to ask you, though, if someone is causing their own problems
and is a friend, is it not not-acting like a true friend to not say
anything because they may react badly? Is it required for genuine
friendship that you try to help them?
With this guy, I tried to help him without referencing the Bible, and he
responded very badly, so I ended it (he called me stupid, so, yeah). I
know from experience you can't have a relationship with someone where
you are on eggshells around them. Because then it is their whims over
your actual needs and humanity.
Response #19:
Sorry about the disappointment. Believers and unbelievers, as you note,
see everything fundamentally different. So while there may be surface
agreement, any time the surface is scratched, the disconnect looms
large.
I've been down for the count for the last couple of days with what seems
to be a dose of Covid (weird symptoms). Feeling better tonight but
tomorrow is the first day of classes . . . so prayers appreciated!
Keeping you in mine daily as well, my friend.
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #20:
Hi Bob,
Your correspondent in #8 worrying about reason and logical truth: Your
patience with me explaining time and space, was most helpful. Our
"logical" reasoning depends on experience and belief. The solution you
taught me was to think carefully about what scripture actually says. For
example, when the disciples asked Jesus why they couldn't cast out a
man's demon, our Lord replied, "Only prayer can cast out this kind of
demon." At first, my reaction was, "But he didn't pray." As I thought
about it, I realized the purpose of prayer is to petition God. I also
realized that he WAS God, so there was no need for him to petition
himself while the apostles did need to pray.
It was your explanation of time and space that changed my thinking on
the above. E.g., the third heaven may be a different space, but anything
created that is not omnipresent must move in time and space. That was a
major revelation for me and changed my thinking. In secular areas as
well.
If you see any flaws in my thinking, please correct me. I probably
expressed myself poorly.
For the doubts and fears expressed, which seems to be a common thread,
I've found that being quiet and trusting the quiet voice of the Spirit
is the best (and only) approach. Prayers are answered though maybe not
at the time we want, but at the time we need.
Finally, #23 was spot on! When we realize we have control of very little
and "the evil of the day is sufficient unto itself," the easier it is to
put things in God's hands and enjoy the peace he has given us.
I pray all is well with you and yours.
In our Lord Jesus,
Response #20:
Yes indeed, there is often "more than immediately meets the eye" when it comes
to interpretation of scripture, especially if we are talking about "English
only" examination. It's always best to give God the benefit of the doubt that He
knows what He is doing . . . because of course He knew that when He foreordained
everything.
Re: "I've found that being quiet and trusting the quiet voice of the Spirit
is the best (and only) approach. Prayers are answered though maybe not at the
time we want, but at the time we need." Exactly!
"But the Encourager, the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send in My Name, that One will teach you all [the truth] and will remind you of all [the truth] which I spoke to you."
John 14:26
Keeping you in my prayers daily as well, my friend.
In Jesus,
Bob L.
Question #21:
Ok, thanks professor. This is stuff I'll have to think about going
forward.
Sad news that John MacArthur went home to be with the Lord. Did you hear
about that? At least he's in a better place and won't ever see the
Tribulation. I wasn't a fan and I definitely disagreed with some of his
views but I do believe he was one of the few well-known pastors out
there who actually taught much of anything of substance. I think his
approach was better than most and I liked his no- nonsense,
non-compromising attitude when it came to standing his ground against
attacks toward the truth (when he was on the right side of the issue).
I've been praying for his family. That's a big loss for the evangelical
world.
Just curious, but do you have any plans on what you're going to be doing
after completing the Hebrews series?
In Christ,
Response #21:
No problem. Do feel free to write back about this.
No, I hadn't heard this. He was 86, so that is not a bad "departure
age", being more than what we have a right to expect (Ps.90:10), but in
many cases – and, I take it, in his case – not so old as to not be able
to continue one's work.
I had my issues with his teaching as well (as you no doubt no from prior
postings). He spoke at my seminary chapel once while I was getting my
M.A.B.S. at Talbot.
If I'm not mistaken, MacArthur was pre-Trib as almost all in his nexus
are. Whatever he did that was positive for the Lord and His Church will
not go without its reward. This close to the Tribulation, one would hope
that in his absence some of his followers would take the opportunity to
reevaluate. If they don't do so before the seven years begin, they'll
certainly have to do so afterward.
It's good of you to be keeping his family in your prayers.
As to "what's after Hebrews?", that has not definitely been decided, but
I am leaning toward a "final preparations" series that is topical rather
than verse by verse. I still have a long way to go with chapter thirteen
first, however!
Prayers appreciated as always. Keeping you in mine daily, my friend.
In Jesus,
Bob L.